Romy

The thing is, even though oaks may be more profitable, it's absurd to think they're better than willows- Willows are faster exp. Maples/Yews/Magic tree are (way) faster cash. Most Willow-cutters are after exp, which is way they should pick the best to get said exp.

Yeah, Noah cursed him because he stared at his (Noah's) genitals- Highly unaccepted in the Patriarchal society.

What do you make of the story of Moses then? Actualy... God, supposedly (I'm an Atheist...), determined certain rules for Slavery (which would openly mean God accepted it, else he wouldn't have suggested any rules in the first place), such as having to respect slaves even though they're your slaves, not letting them over-work, and giving them the option to free themselves every 7th year. You can even find the circumstances in which one should become a slave (when in big debt if I'm not wrong).

I think your right about Israel except if you go to like Torah school (or whatever they might call it) you're exempt. Yeah, 3 years for guys, 2 for girls. And if you're in a "Yeshiva", or are overweight/underweight or are having mental and/or phsysical problems that prevent proper activity, then you can't join the army. If you're a member of a bereaved family (as in, a close relative have died during and because of his/her Military Service) you can decide not to join the army.

When would you say war is the answer? Out of curiosity It's kinda funny every time I post a topic online I am surprised by how many people agree with the views that you never hear about. I wonder on how many issues my view of the balance of opinions is distorted. Well when an unstable, aggressive government regime takes over a country, and are posing a very serious threat, and when you ask them to resolve it peacefully and they just give you the finger. Then, I'd say going to war is justified rather than just waiting for them to invade. For example, 1930-1940's Germany. Nazi regime takes over, starts building a large military, everyone says stop building a military. They don't stop. Countries say well fine, you can have the military but don't use it. German troops invade Poland. I think that's a fine time to go to war, because it's pretty obvious at that point that peaceful negotiation isn't going to work. It wasn't that obvious at the time, most actualy thought they're doing a great thing by not going to war (such as Neville Chamberline and his certaincy of the "Peace" he had achieved).

360 again Oo...

I'd hate to burst your bubble, but you move to the West...

Someone here forgot the Combat Triangle is unbalanced....

370.

There's nothing 'wrong' with it. Some just don't like the sound of it, and thus claim to know and believe the 'other' truth.

Not 'the', 'a'.

370 :)!

It can be logically proven. Anything I, you, or anyone else for that matter does, has (at times along with none egoistical reasons) (an) egoistical reason(s) behind it. I understand what you're saying but you can apply that to literally anything, infinitely and reducibly. But, I like to believe some people sometimes are not so driven by self -- and so like many others: I do not eat at a fancy restaurant soley to take a good [cabbage] the next day. :thumbup: I'll try to give an example. A painter paints a beautiful picture in the hope that he will sell it for a large sum of money. The second painter paints a beautiful picture because he wants to improve himself and his skills. A third painter paints a stunning landscape because he admires the scenery around him and wishes to preserve that moment. The first two are being fuelled by "egotistical" reasons, but wouldn't you say the second is better than the first ? But, I'm sure you agree that the third is the only reason why painters must paint masterpieces, why composers must compose symphonies and the rest of us should exist at all. Yes ? It is not because we are invited to, but we are compelled to. The point still stands. Whether your actions are more self-serving or less self-serving, the bottom line is- They're self-serving. Any action done by person X must be self serving to X, and the measure plays only a tiny role. You clearly didn't read about the third painter. What I'm saying now, is that even if there is no part of ego or self involved, people like you will try to find something. Clearly painter 3 only painted it for so and so reason. When you boil it down that much, this percieved egotism becomes a justification or reasoning of person X, that will look like self-servience but is really not. Tell me what motive the third painter had. I did read about the third painter. The mere fact that the painter painted something because he likes the view, immediately points that there is a self-serving cause here. I thought it was obvious which is why I didn't bother commenting on that. "People like you"? Lol, that's pure logic, nothing else to it. If by people like me you mean those who would rather use their logic, then alright. I'd rather not be one of those who simply refuse to believe human beings are such egoistical beings, only because it doesn't sound too good. I repeat: Anything done by anyone has atleast 1 self-serving cause, and on most cases more than 1.

390.

It can be logically proven. Anything I, you, or anyone else for that matter does, has (at times along with none egoistical reasons) (an) egoistical reason(s) behind it. I understand what you're saying but you can apply that to literally anything, infinitely and reducibly. But, I like to believe some people sometimes are not so driven by self -- and so like many others: I do not eat at a fancy restaurant soley to take a good [cabbage] the next day. :thumbup: I'll try to give an example. A painter paints a beautiful picture in the hope that he will sell it for a large sum of money. The second painter paints a beautiful picture because he wants to improve himself and his skills. A third painter paints a stunning landscape because he admires the scenery around him and wishes to preserve that moment. The first two are being fuelled by "egotistical" reasons, but wouldn't you say the second is better than the first ? But, I'm sure you agree that the third is the only reason why painters must paint masterpieces, why composers must compose symphonies and the rest of us should exist at all. Yes ? It is not because we are invited to, but we are compelled to. The point still stands. Whether your actions are more self-serving or less self-serving, the bottom line is- They're self-serving. Any action done by person X must be self serving to X, and the measure plays only a tiny role.

'Malak' in Hebrew literally means 'messenger'. It's typically translated as 'angel' because the angels are God's messengers. In Modern Hebrew, it is very rarely used as "messenger". It is true that the original word did mean that, but nowdays most (fluent) Hebrew speakers wouldn't even understand what you mean if you used it in that context. Also: Melzar (Melzar the mad, from Dragon Slayer) means waiter in Hebrew. No idea why though Oo... Edit: according to the Runescape Wikia, it's because Melzar and the Culinaromancer (from RFD) are related, and is possibly why Melzar got his name... I wouldn't bet on it though, since RFD was released much after Dragon Slayer.

I never said it's not tolerated at all, only that it's less tolerated. On the contrary, Americans didn't even really know what an Arab (over-exaggeration to make a point) was til 9/11. There has been countless articles on how discrimination of Arabs since then has fluxed. But disregard the articles. Next time people asks your race just say that you're an Iraqi or Palestinian or some Arab, and see the response. (I suggest first reading this without paying attention to what's written in parentheses) I trust that if someone were to make a racist comment on the following: Jews, Muslims, Arabs, blacks, or any other "race" (you have no idea how much I despise the term, but for the sake of simplicity, there it is...) that was or still is "considered" (for the lack of a better word) inferior (as sad as it may be), then that comment would, at most social cycles, be frowned upon. I also trust that if someone were to make a racist comment on Americans, he'd probably get laughs (if the comment is in the form of a joke) or not be paid much attention to (if in a different form). The point is, that although I certainly agree that for some dumb reason the "races" mentioned in the first 3 lines are looked down for by many, racism towards them is much less tolerated (or atleast, racism in its' spoken form).

Well, I bet most of you did not know that Marshmellos are made of fish bones... I don't think people should be judged for not knowing what they eat, but rather for their lack of common sense.

Ha! Your own weapon turned against you! :twisted:

Napalmy.